New court AI orders and rules: November 2026 update

What is new, newest first (data through October 22, 2026)

Last updated October 22, 2026. Data through October 22, 2026: every row was checked on that date against the court's own document. An order we know only from a news story, law firm note or tracker is not listed, which is why New York's Part 161 (in force since June 1, 2026) is absent: we have not checked its text at the court. The date column is the date of the order, rule or effective date named in the status column.

Date	Court and instrument	Status	What it requires	Court source	Our page
Oct 21, 2026	Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, agenda item for suggestion 26-CV-21 (new Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(5))	Proposal, not a rule	Would add a certification that "the legal authorities exist and are accurately cited." The agenda memo suggests dropping it because current Rule 11 already supports sanctions. We did not find the meeting outcome.	Civil Rules agenda book, Oct 21, 2026 (p. 293)	Court AI disclosure cheat sheet
Oct 15, 2026	Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, proposed Fed. R. Evid. 707 (machine-generated evidence)	Proposal withdrawn as published	The Committee voted to withdraw the proposed rule as issued for public comment and submit a modified proposal for further study. The meeting included a panel on AI and Rule 707.	Evidence Rules agenda book, Oct 15, 2026	AI rules taking effect January 2027
Sep 18, 2026	U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, proposed 10th Cir. R. 46.5(B)(4)	Proposed; effective Jan 1, 2027 if adopted	Certification that any document prepared with generative AI was reviewed before filing by a human who verified the cited authorities, quotations, citations and legal analysis. Comments closed Oct 18; final rules are due by Nov 30, 2026.	Tenth Circuit memo on 2027 rule changes (redline text in the full redline PDF)	Tenth Circuit page
Sep 1, 2026	U.S. District Court, N.D. Tex., Judge Jane J. Boyle, chambers requirement on AI	In effect (judge-specific)	No text generated by AI in attorney filings before her; a signed certificate that a human attorney generated the text. AI used to find errors must be disclosed under Local Rule 7.2(f). Non-compliant filings may be stricken.	Judge Boyle chambers page	Fifth Circuit page
Aug 1, 2026	Indiana Supreme Court, Order 26S-MS-8 (order dated Jul 14, 2026): Trial Rules 11 and 11.1	Adopted, in effect	An attorney's signature certifies that any cited legal authority is authentic; Rule 11.1 sets signing duties for unrepresented parties. Both rules apply to filings prepared with AI, the internet or other resources. Courts may strike non-compliant filings.	Indiana Supreme Court order 26S-MS-8	Indiana
Jul 21, 2026	Iowa Supreme Court, order adopting Iowa Court Rules chapter 27	Adopted; effective Jan 1, 2027	Governs judges and their staff, not lawyers: no delegating to AI, independent verification of AI-prepared sources, and only committee-approved tools with case information.	Iowa Court Rules chapter 27 (the order is at .../files/2228/embedDocument/)	Iowa
Jul 14, 2026	Connecticut Appellate Rules, Sections 60-4, 62-6 and 85-2	Adopted, in effect on publication	Generative AI amendments in the appellate rules, published in the Connecticut Law Journal on Jul 14, 2026 after approval by the Supreme Court (Jun 30) and the Appellate Court (Jun 23).	Connecticut Law Journal, Jul 14, 2026	Connecticut
Jun 26, 2026	Supreme Court of Texas, Misc. Docket 26-9054: proposed Tex. R. Civ. P. 13 and Tex. R. App. P. 9 and 52	Proposed; no final order found on Oct 22	A signer would represent that they verified the filing, including that citations, quotations and holdings are not fabricated, whether or not AI was used. The Court said it expected an Oct 1, 2026 effective date. The Court's 2026 orders index, read today, lists orders only through Oct 2 and none finalizes 26-9054.	Texas Supreme Court Misc. Docket 26-9054	Texas
Jun 23, 2026	Connecticut Superior Court, Practice Book Section 4-9	Adopted by the judges on Jun 11, in effect on publication	Anyone who uses generative AI in creating or editing a filed document must independently verify all citations, legal authorities and evidence it produced. Sanctions can include nonsuit or default judgment.	Connecticut Law Journal, Jun 23, 2026	Connecticut regulation guide
Jun 2026	Rhode Island Supreme Court, amended Rule 1.1 comment [6] and interim generative AI guidelines	Adopted comment; guidelines are advisory	The Rule 1.1 comment adds the benefits and risks of technology to the competence duty. The interim guidelines for lawyers and for judicial officers do not amend the rules or carry the force of law. The order text leaves the day blank.	Rhode Island Supreme Court order	Rhode Island
Jun 15, 2026	Florida Supreme Court, amended Rule 2.515(d)(2) (opinion SC2026-0673, May 28, 2026)	Adopted, in effect Jun 15, 2026	The signer of any filing, lawyer or not, represents that the legal authorities identified exist and are accurately cited. Sanctions may include reprimand, contempt, striking, dismissal, costs and fees.	Florida Supreme Court opinion SC2026-0673	Florida
Jun 15, 2026	Florida Supreme Court, Administrative Order AOSC26-12 (May 28, 2026)	Adopted, in effect Jun 15, 2026	Courts may not impose AI disclosure or certification requirements through local orders, policies or practices; they rely on Rule 2.515(d)(2). Courts may still educate users and govern their own employees' AI use.	Florida Supreme Court AOSC26-12	Florida

How to read the table

Adopted means the court's own text says it is in force or has a stated effective date. Proposal means a committee agenda, a published draft or a comment period: do not plan around it as a rule.
Verification, not disclosure. Florida, Indiana and the proposed Texas rule ask the signer to stand behind the cited authority whether or not AI was used. Florida goes further and bars local AI disclosure orders.
AI-specific duties. Connecticut's Section 4-9 applies to anyone who uses generative AI in a filing; the Tenth Circuit proposal would certify human review of AI-assisted documents.
Judge-level orders vary within one courthouse. Judge Boyle's requirement bans AI-generated text in attorney filings before her; it does not bind other judges in the Northern District of Texas.
Courts that bind judges, not lawyers. Iowa's chapter 27 and the Rhode Island judicial guidelines address the bench.

What we could not confirm

The outcome of the Civil Rules Committee's October 21 meeting on suggestion 26-CV-21, and of the Evidence Rules Committee's October 15 meeting beyond what its agenda book says.
Whether Texas has finalized Misc. Docket 26-9054 after the October 2 entries in its orders index.
The final Tenth Circuit text. The court says final rules will be posted by November 30, 2026.
Any court order known only through a law firm, a tracker or a news site. Those are left out of the table on purpose.

Next steps for a filing team

This is operational information, not legal advice. Check the court, the judge and the date.

Before each filing in a Florida, Indiana or Connecticut court, confirm every cited authority exists against a primary source. Keep the record in a log such as our citation verification log template.
For Judge Boyle's cases, confirm the signed human-authorship certificate. Elsewhere in the Northern District of Texas, read the assigned judge's page.
For the Tenth Circuit, watch for the final rules on or before November 30, 2026, effective January 1, 2027 if adopted.
See the court AI disclosure cheat sheet and the court disclosure map for the wider picture, and AI rules taking effect January 2027 for California SB 574 and Iowa.

Sources

Questions and answers

Which court AI rules took effect most recently?

Of the instruments we read, Indiana's Trial Rule 11 and 11.1 amendments took effect August 1, 2026, and Judge Boyle's AI requirement in the Northern District of Texas took effect September 1, 2026. Both are in the table with the court's own text.

Is the Tenth Circuit AI certification rule in effect?

No. It is proposed as 10th Cir. R. 46.5(B)(4). The court's memo says changes take effect January 1, 2027, comments closed October 18, 2026 and the final rules will be posted by November 30, 2026.

Does Texas have a statewide AI filing rule now?

Not as of October 22, 2026 in the sources we read. The Supreme Court of Texas preliminarily approved amendments to Rule 13 and appellate Rules 9 and 52 on June 26, 2026 and said it expected them to take effect October 1. Its 2026 orders index lists no final order for Misc. Docket 26-9054.

Do Florida courts still require AI disclosure?

No. Administrative Order AOSC26-12 says courts may not impose AI disclosure or certification requirements, and Rule 2.515(d)(2) requires the signer to represent that cited authorities exist and are accurately cited.

Why does this page leave out some known orders?

We only list an order after reading it on the court's own site on the date above. Orders known only through a news article, a law firm summary or a tracker are excluded.

Operational information, not legal advice. Each row was read from the court's own document on October 22, 2026; rules, orders and proposals change, so confirm with the court before you file. Prepared with AI assistance from the cited primary texts and reviewed by AI Vortex.